Dana White Meeting Resistance on Teammate vs Teammate Fights in the UFC
by Kid Nate on Aug 18, 2009 11:00 PM EDT
in News
117 comments
Dana White talked to CBS Sports and touched on the controversial teammate vs teammate point, Anderson Silva disagrees:
"It has nothing to do with friendship," White said. "It's about seeing who's the best."
Silva has been ultra-successful in his two forays to the 205-pound weight class. Neither of his two opponents -- Forrest Griffin or James Irvin -- made it past the opening round. To White, Silva's winning streak makes the fight inevitable.
"If Anderson continues to take out 205-ers, I'll make that fight [vs. Machida]," White said.
However, Silva has a much different opinion on the potential dream match. He has trained with Machida in the past and the two remain close.
"Machida is my friend," Silva said. "He's my brother. There's no way that fight will happen."
He's not the only one. Nate Marquardt talks to Steve Cofield on his radio show (the whole interview is a must-listen. Marquardt makes the case for himself as the most likely to beat Anderson Silva and breaks down the other contenders, plus Forrest Griffin's game plan):
Make to sure to listen to the end of conversation when Marquardt addresses the issues of teammates squaring off. The 185 and 205 pounders at Jackson's Submission Fighting have repeatedly stated they will ot fight one another. Marquardt said they can't be made to under circumstances.
And then Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira pipes up too about his twin brother Rogerio's likely arrival in the UFC and how he'll fit in with the division:
Rogerio "Minotouro" Nogueira will be joining his good friends and training partners Anderson Silva and Lyoto Machida atop the UFC's stacked light heavyweight division, but don't expect to see him fight either one according to Rodrigo.
"I can not see them facing each other," Rodrigo said. "We are training partners. It's stupid to say I want to see a fight between those guys. I think it's not going to happen for sure. We've trained together before. We're partners training. I don't know. That's up to Rogerio. I can't respond for him, but he's Lyoto's friend and Anderson's friend. I don't think that fight is gonna happen. I think that Silva, Machida and Rogerio are the three strongest guys in the [light] weight division and I think they can control that weight division for a long time. As long as they stay healthy and they stay in shape. I think it will be hard to beat those three guys."
Cage Potato takes the side of the fighters in all this:
First of all, what does he mean by "make that fight"? As in, he'll put 'Anderson Silva vs. Lyoto Machida' on a fight poster and that'll be that, even if neither of them actually signs the bout agreement? This is the same rhetoric we used to hear in regards to a possible Rashad Evans vs. Keith Jardine fight. The more they said they wouldn't do it, the more White seemed to think it was absolutely necessary to make them do it.
On one hand, DW has a point. If you're in this business to be the best, you'd better be willing to knee your mother in the face if she gets in your way. But that ignores some of the realities of the fight game. Pitting two teammates against each other, as White wanted to do with Evans and Jardine, would create an awkward situation in the gym. They obviously can't train together like they normally would, and their coaches either have to take a side or else stay completely away from both guys.
But there's also the issue of autonomy. Sure, Dana White is the boss, but hasn't the best fighter in the organization earned the right to say ‘no' sometimes? It's not as if he's asking for a procession of tomato cans. In fact, whether they've put him against an uninteresting middleweight, or some dude to help them counter-program a rival on late notice, or a former light heavyweight champ - Silva has been pretty good about doing what the UFC wants.
Photo via MMA Mania.
0 recs |
117 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
What’s White gonna do, give Strikeforce Anderson Silva to punish him for refusing to fight a friend in a heavier weight class? Somehow I doubt it.
A wise man told me don't argue with fools
Cause people from a distance can't tell who is who
by thetakeover on Aug 18, 2009 11:09 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Until this gets to point that a title gets locked up because a guy is a champ in a division and his teammates are continuously knocking off contenders, I don’t see this being a problem…
by Tonley on Aug 18, 2009 11:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
These things have a way of working themselves out. For a while, everyone thought the three AKA welterweights would have to fight … then Fitch lost to GSP and Kos lost all his momentum and suddenly it is not an issue anymore. Then, everyone assumed Evans & Jardine were on a collission course … then Jardine resumed his win-one-lose-one pattern, Rashad got demolished by Machida, and nobody cares about that fight anymore.
by Steve4192 on Aug 18, 2009 11:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was stupid talking about Evans-Jardine because they were addressing it before Jardine had to fight Rampage. Unsurprisingly, Jardine was not in line for a title shot after that fight.
by bigweeze on Aug 19, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
But you can’t always count on that. What if Jardine DID beat Rampage? The laws of statistics say that at some point, the two top fighters will be from the same camp. What do we do when that happens?
The key to good conflict resolution is to resolve the conflict before it occurs.
by Shaun32887 on Aug 19, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Additionally
When fighters are maneuvered via circumstances into fighting each other when they really don’t want to, they don’t always put on great fights.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 18, 2009 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They will become glorified sparring match ups.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Aug 18, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I’ve said before, this isn’t a video game. People fight who they want to fight, and if they’re willing to put personal loyalty ahead of ambition, then I say, more power to them.
People on the outside like to say that MMA isn’t a team sport, but I see otherwise. Many fighters wouldn’t be where they are without their teammates, and wouldn’t want to undermine that for an average payday…not when there are other fights to be made. Many wouldn’t compromise it even for a HUGE payday.
And from a fan’s perspective, do we want to see fighters fighting that don’t want to fight one another? We accept it on the reality show, because the team thing is often a contrivance, and reality TV is contrived anyway, but in real life, we shouldn’t be supporting fighters having their autonomy undercut by supporting even subtly coerced fights. If the UFC pits Josh Koscheck against Jon Fitch, and says that the loser gets cut, is that REALLY the type of thing we want to put our PPV dollars behind?
by madiq on Aug 18, 2009 11:18 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
whatever...
am i the only one thinks “if they don’t want to fight, they don’t want to fight.” ? i’m not interested if they aren’t
by cagefightonacid on Aug 18, 2009 11:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Because if they don’t want to fight it can’t be a good fight. I want to see machida vs Silva, but if it’s not happening let’s move on quick.
It can become an issue though. I can see the UFC taking drastic measures on this subject in the near future.
You don't look like a Tanaka.
by spectaa on Aug 18, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed…. but hopefully if the fans aren’t clamouring, then they won’t take those drastic measures. hopefully =)
by cagefightonacid on Aug 18, 2009 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s say DW manages to somehow force teammates to fight eachother. What would stop those teammates to choreograph the fight during training. Everyone would speculate that they had done so whether they had or not. It’s just not good business to force fighter’s to do things that they do not want to do.
"Stop smiling you are about to be punched in the face !"
by Warhand on Aug 18, 2009 11:30 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
That wouldn’t say much for their integrity, to sign the contract and then provide a false outcome.
It won’t happen.
by bigweeze on Aug 19, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People often put integrity aside when forced to do something they don’t want to do.
"Stop smiling you are about to be punched in the face !"
by Warhand on Aug 19, 2009 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They wouldn’t sign the contract, that is what would happen.
by bigweeze on Aug 19, 2009 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am of the opinion that teammates should fight. I believe this is an individual sport, and that if divisions get clogged up b/c of teammates not willing to fight, or there is a title at stake, then they should fight. If we really consider MMA a sport, which I believe it is, then how are teammates competing against one another in MMA any different than former college, high school, or pro teammates in football, basketball, baseball, you name it, competing against eachother?
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 18, 2009 11:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
strong argument, and though i have said i don’t mind giving up teammates fighting, your point is unarguable.
by cagefightonacid on Aug 19, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for not bashing my opinion just b/c it’s different than yours.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i enjoy different perspectives =)
by cagefightonacid on Aug 20, 2009 3:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how are teammates competing against one another in MMA any different than former college, high school, or pro teammates in football, basketball, baseball, you name it, competing against eachother?
I think the amount of former teammates in MMA who don’t want to fight each other is significantly smaller than the amount of current teammates who don’t wish to.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Former or current teammates, it doesn’t really matter to me. I probably should have put the word teammates in quotes, b/c as I stated earlier, I believe MMA is an individual sport.
And to reiterate, even if these teammates are friends and that is the main reason they don’t want to fight, I personally don’t buy it. Again this is a sport, and any other sport, when they have to, friends will compete again eachother. You wouldn’t see good friends on the football field not tackle one another just b/c they were “teammates.” It’s really nonsense to me.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many current teammates do you typically see tackling each other during football games? There’s only two people in a cage, but cooperation and preparation within many camps in MMA is often more akin to people on the same team than it is to guys who merely happen to train in the same building.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are, of course, many examples of fighters who haven’t exhibited hang-ups about fighting friends and teammates. I don’t think there’s anything philosophical wrong with having teammates fight—rather, as cagefightonacid rather succinctly noted above, “I’m not interested if they aren’t.”
However, if it only takes some extra compensation to sufficiently motivate teammates to have a competitive match, then I’m all for it.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where did I state that football players that are currently teammates would tackle eachother? Don’t be silly. Plus my point is, I don’t consider the whole teammate thing to be real in an individual sport. Friends compete again eachother all the time in any other sport, MMA should be no different.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You keep saying that former teammates in stick and ball sports compete with each other all the time, so why can’t current teammates in MMA do the same. Those are not perfect analogues.
Boxing and Kickboxing are more similar to MMA, in that they are fightsports, and I’m hard pressed to think of many important bouts between current training partners or current members of the same camp in either of of those sports.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Klitschko Brothers sure don’t/won’t do it…
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly don’t see too many big time camps in boxing anyways, so this conflict doesn’t really come up as often as it does in mma.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also another point I’d like to bring up, is that in boxing with the alphabet soup of titles they have, friends don’t necessarily have to fight eachother. They have other options. In MMA, there really is only one title to strive for right now. Friends not fighting eachother in MMA is more noticeable than in boxing b/c of their being only one dominant org. With their being only one org (the UFC), there is more of a chance of divisions being clogged up by friends unwilling to fight eachother. And as a fan, I don’t wanna see that.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is an excellent point. The Aldo/Fabiano conundrum is an excellent example of how this can pose a problem (although this is technically still a theoretical problem, as neither of them has reached the top yet).
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Aldo/Fabiano situation is ideally what I’d like to see if teammates don’t wanna fight one another. IMO, if you don’t wanna fight a teammate, either leave that org. or move up or down to another weight class. I don’t see the point or how it helps anyone when teammates don’t wanna fight another but will stick around in the same division and just eliminate contenders.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really don’t see the problem with having good fighters in an organization or division who don’t hold a belt. Let’s say Aldo wins and Fabiano stays at that weight.
If contender Z needs to beat Fabiano to earn a title shot and he doesn’t, then he doesn’t get the shot. Nothing odd with that.
If contender Y gets to Aldo without facing Fabiano (due to scheduling for example), then he either wins and opens the division, or loses and can still face Fabiano.
If Fabiano is happy with this situation, and Aldo is happy with this situation, then why should I as a fan be unhappy?
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In fact, if Nova Uniao really gets after it and takes over the top 4 spots in a division and and those 4 guys refuse to fight each other, instead fighting all the top contenders as the promoter arbitrarily sees fit—I still don’t see the big deal.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s say Aldo wins the title. Then Fabiano refuses to fight him and just starts eliminating contenders. When and who does Aldo fight? Does Aldo just sit around and wait till Fabiano loses? There’s where I see the problem.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The way to a title-shot is not a zero-sum game, espically if one guy is never going to get a shot. Some contenders would face Fabiano, some would face other up and comers—just like every other division already. The only difference is that Fabiano doesn’t get a shot when he wins—and that’s at his own discretion in this case.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For example
Brock Lesnar doesn’t have to wait around for every other HW to face each other until there is only one clear guy to face him every time. Promoters schedule many concurrent fights that continually redefine who is nearest to a title shot.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know everyone in the MMA community would be clamoring for a title fight b/w Aldo and Fabiano (or any other teammates) if they were to remain undefeated in their division and knocking off contenders. If that were to happen, a fight not being made b/w the 2 would be extremley disappointing to many fans, including myself.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 2:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you’d rather not see one guy fight anybody good at all than see him fight everybody good save for one?
That doesn’t make any sense to me.
At any rate, the longer 2 guys were to keep something like that up, the more lucrative the potential fight would be. As we already agreed (I think), the more lucrative the fight, the more likely it is to happen.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That first sentence is barely coherent, I shall reword:
Rather than have one guy fight good talent in a division except for one man, you’d rather him fight less good talent outside of the organization (and still not fight that one man)?
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 2:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t fully get what you’re saying. I’d rather see a guy move up or down in weight if he refuses to fight in a division where his teammate is champ than take out potential contenders and tease with a match that will never happen. I will agree that if teammates are holding out for more money, then so be it, that’s fine with me. But I still will not accept teammates not willing to fight eachother if they have to in an individual sport.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 2:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t fully understand what you want out of these athletes. To return to the above example, you seem to prefer that Fabiano should simply leave the WEC (despite the fact that, as in the previous example, he would be winning every fight) because you wouldn’t be able to see him fight Aldo, despite the fact that if he were to leave the WEC you still wouldn’t see him fight Aldo, and you probably wouldn’t see him fight the same quality of opposition. (This could be a bigger problem in some divisions than others)
You’d have every reason to be disappointed that you weren’t getting Fabiano/Aldo, but to therefore prefer not to see him at all is sour grapes.
I don’t see “taking out potential contenders” as a legitimate reason to banish a winner fighter from a particular division. “Potential contenders” run the risk of sliding back down a division with every fight they take, regardless of whether their opponent is on a title track.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 7:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As has been posted by other people further down in the thread. Where does it end? Let’s say Machida, Silva, Feijao, Nogueira all dominate the light-heavy division and are the clear 4 best, yet refuse to fight eachother. How is the casual fan gonna accept that they shouldn’t fight b/c they’re such good friends and they’re “teammates?” I’ll answer that, they won’t. Fans are already clamoring for Silva vs Machida when it isn’t even warranted right now. A lot of the casuals don’t follow who’s in who’s camp, it doesn’t matter to them, b/c IMO it’s an individual sport. This is the risk you run by competing in this sport, there’s a good chance at the highest levels, you may have to face a friend.
So again where does it end if a whole camp of guys start to dominate a division?
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In situations like these, I bring up Venus and Serena Williams. Not only are their matches often viewed as lackluster, there is an undercurrent of fans and commentators that believe that the two of them have an “understanding” about which of them will win when they face off. If something like that came into play during an Anderson Silva vs. Lyoto Machida, or a Tyson Griffin vs. Gray Maynard main event, the blogosphere would go crazy, and allegations of “fix” would be too much to bear.
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you make my point for me. Even in another individual sport such as tennis, freakin sisters are forced to compete against one another. What makes MMA above this? I agree that the bouts b/w teammates could be lackluster or have a lot of fix allegations, but the direct refusal to compete against a “teammate”/friend is odd to me when in any other sport it happens all the time.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't you think that Tennis and MMA are a bit different
Tennis is a sport. Pure and simple.
In my mind, MMA, and the action of bashing someone else’s face in goes slightly beyond that. MMA is a weird middle-ground between sport and actual fighting.
And I think that particularly for Lyoto (and Fedor) the martial ‘way’ gets in the way of them fighting against their principles.
by rainmaker6 on Aug 19, 2009 12:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also think that
Greg Jackson tries to instil this mindset in this fighters. Although they aren’t all there yet, I think Jackson himself is close to that ‘Zen’ mindset of a true martial artist.
When money no longer matters and the only thing that matters is going beyond your own comfort zone and challenging yourself against bigger and better obstacles.
by rainmaker6 on Aug 19, 2009 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly I don't
We made this thing into a sport by putting rules and regulations on it. Yes it’s a fight, but I believe it’s the sport of fighting, just like boxing, kickboxing, bjj, or any other martial art.
We want this thing to be treated like a real sport by putting it on ESPN and getting mainstream attention, yet MMA is now the exception when it comes to friends competing against one another? I just don’t buy it.
I understand your point, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree to Disagree is fine :)
We all appreciate the intellectual discussion.
I definitely think that when the sole objective is to physically damage your opponent, then it goes a little beyond ‘sport’.
I would say that MMA goes beyond kickboxing and boxing, closer to the level of actual ‘fighting’.
by rainmaker6 on Aug 19, 2009 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d love to hear examples of boxers and kickboxers who are close friends competing against each other in a non-tournament setting…
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that many of us have “competed” against our closest friends, but have never punched them in the face. Remember the finish of Henderson-Bisping? Do we think that Rashad Evans would bring that type hammer down on Keith Jardine as readily as he would on Forrest Griffin? Do we think that Jose Aldo would do what he did to Cub Swanson to Wagney Fabiano? I don’t know that we’d see that, and I don’t blame fighters for that being the case. All that I’d ask is that they not accept the fight in the first place.
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m pretty sure many close friends have competed against one another in boxing matches. Is MMA any different? Like I’ve stated earlier, I do think many bouts b/w “teammates” could end up becoming lackluster, but I don’t think that should prevent them from happening if necessary.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d love to hear examples, since you’re so sure. And like I’ve said, if we’re expecting fans to pay for the fights, we can’t accept the likelihood that a fight will turn into Leites-Silva. Or conversely, if two teammates pulled a Davis-Lytle, how would we feel about two guys conspiring to earn a lucrative Fight of the Night bonus then? How close to pro wrestling to fights need to get in terms of staging before the sport is undermined?
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s no need to be condescending about the boxing thing, especially when I haven’t screamed that my point is above anyone elses. I honestly can’t think of a boxing match off the top of the dome b/w two friends, but there have been recent examples in MMA. Look at the fight to get into the house b/w teammates on the most recent season of TUF. Or back during the Pride Middleweight Grand Prix when Wandy and Shogun entered knowing they could fight eachother. I just feel when its necessary for teammates to fight, they should, that’s all. I don’t think that worrying about all the bad things that could happen should prevent a fight from happening. I don’t think that players in the NFL miss tackles on purpose just b/c their friend is carrying the ball.
We won’t really know for sure what will happen unless teammates do fight. So all of this is just speculation anyways.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do agree with that—what could go wrong shouldn’t stand in the way of things happening.
I just think also “what could go right” can’t override the concerns of the participants. Some teams and teammates have no objections to fighting each other. Some do but perhaps only as a negotiating tactic. Others might have serious objections to fighting a teammate and I find it difficult to argue with that.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
marco antonio barerra fought johnny tapia not too long ago (5 years i think), and they were very good friends. it wasn’t the best fight in the world, mainly b/c tapia had faded alot and barrera still had the goods. it did seem that barerra din’t go for the kill either, but it was also pretty well known that barerra only took the fight to give tapia 1 last good payday. back in the golden era of boxing, the 30’s,40’s, and somewhat 50’s it wasnt uncommon at all for fighters to have over a 100 fights, in which they fought friends and teamates frequently, and was seen as an insult not to give 100%. fans and fighters both called it being a professonal.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 1:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for doing the research for me.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’d be neat if that was the prevailing culture today. Individual fights mean an awful lot more, especially in MMA, but that doesn’t preclude a shift in culture to that ideal.
That being said, in the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s there were a lot of things different about a lot of elements of sporting culture.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
very true. the money is so much bigger now, boxers want the easiest fights, the easiest opponents for the most money as possible. it’s part of why the sport is in the dumper in the states.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing I have to offer to this debate is Pete Sell V. Scott Smith. Everyone is playing the hypothetical game in the negative direction, so I’m going in the entertaining one. What if they they really go for it and high five after every good shot AND there is an epic finish?
by CliChe Guevara on Aug 19, 2009 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody had to coerce Sell and Smith to make that fight, which makes it rather apples to oranges here.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess the only way to resolve this is to have somebody go explain to the camps that they ought to get over it and fight each other.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, if teamates were to fight ( even though i don’t feel that it’s a nesccasity?) the 1rst punch landed would throw the friendship out the window, at least until the fight is over. i believe it’s their basic instinct to fight as hard as possible until the fight is over. i think teamates or “friends” could make for some of the best fights. jmo.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the past, sometimes they have made for good fights and sometimes they most certainly have not.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that many of us have "competed" against our closest friends, but have never punched them in the face.
You need to hang out with me and my friends…
by EnsignFrog on Aug 19, 2009 1:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
same…me and my friends even used to put on boxing gloves and fight eachother for fun…(randomly still do, but not the same at age 25 as it was ages 14-21)
or my “best friend” went to my HS’s rival and first varsity basketball game against eachother he hit me in the nuts about 30 seconds into the game, I elbowed him in the face down low and gave him the sickest cut on the lip I’ve ever seen, his teeth went through his lip, a few days later he was at my house watching college bowl games….
by Reaser16 on Aug 19, 2009 3:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was going to use the if MMA is a sport line but i see you beat me to it. I know its not the same but what if two teams were friends, would they not compete either. For arguments sake what if the #1-5 ranked fighters in a particular division where all teammates, would we just not have the best fighting the best. Isn’t that what we all want in any sport.
Bloody Elbow Pound-for-Pound the Best in Ultimate Fighting (UFC) Commentary, News and Community
by ronniebonnie on Aug 19, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly my point
Let’s say Machida, Silva, and Lil Nog all run through UFC light-heavys. Who in their right mind wouldn’t wanna settle who’s the best b/w them? The casual fan doesn’t give a damn if these people are “teammates.” It’s an individual sport to find out who’s the best at each weight class.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Dana’s take on this reveals his boxing background. Boxing truly is an individual sport where sparring partners are all potential future opponents. He doesn’t come from the team based tradition of wrestling or the dojo based culture of BJJ. He can’t wrap his head around guys not wanting to prove that they are THE best, rather than just one of the best.
And, in the long run, Dana is right. Just like in boxing, when the money gets big enough, guys will fight anybody. If Machida & Silva were being offered $10MM or $20MM to fight, you can bet your ass they would change their tune.
by Steve4192 on Aug 18, 2009 11:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think anyone has raised objections to teammates fighting if they actually want to fight each other. (Though I think there could still be some lackluster bouts.)
It’s really all about incentives in the end: the more a promoter sees a clear benefit to having particular teammates fight, the more said teammates will be offered to fight; larger rewards for taking such a bout in turn increases the likelihood of acceptance by fighters who were otherwise reluctant.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree completely
I do think the bouts could be lackluster. I also agree that if enough money is offered, that teammates will fight if they have to. I don’t see friends denying eachother a huge payday if it is offered.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s really two ways to see this. One is that if fighters are going to be paid the same amount to fight a teammate as a non-teammate, then there’s no reason to do it. In that situation, saying you won’t fight is a pseudo-negotiating tool, and Zuffa needs to pay fighters a premium for going against their preferences. The other way of seeing this is that MMA is a team sport, and fighters achieve their best selves when they’re allowed to train together. In this context, depriving a fighter of a longtime training partner, and forcing teams/camps to pick sides, just makes sure that neither fighter is optimized, and not only doesn’t the fight really prove who the better man is, and not only will the fight be lacking the “sizzle factor” of bad blood, but teammates will be less likely to share weaknesses with teammates who might be potential opponents, and they perhaps might develop more slowly than they would have if they were confident that they wouldn’t fight their teammates.
Think about it: Does Rashad Evans become a Top 5 Light Heavyweight without Keith Jardine? Does Lyoto Machida become a deadly finisher without Anderson Silva? Does Jake Shields develop top-tier submissions without Nick and Nate Diaz? Maybe, but do we want these guys to be selfish, and treat their fighting styles like trade secrets? What purpose does that really serve in the long run?
by madiq on Aug 19, 2009 12:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So what happens if Silva, Machida, Feijão and Lil Nog become #1, #2, #3 and #4 ranked LHWs in the UFC? Do we just settle for them never fighting and depriving the fans and the sport from the Best fighting the Best?
Bloody Elbow Pound-for-Pound the Best in Ultimate Fighting (UFC) Commentary, News and Community
by ronniebonnie on Aug 19, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What are the alternatives?
A: Force them out of the division or organization, in which case you would actually have less of “the best” in the favored organization and you still wouldn’t have the fight you wanted.
B: Coerce them into a fight that they don’t want to do through contract maneuvers—e.g. withholding other fights—in which case you almost certainly still won’t get the best fighting at their best.
C: Offer them enough money to overcome the objections. This may or may not lead to good fights, but It has the benefit of being the only sane option thus far. Additionally, nobody objects to this option. However, there could still be the case that some guys would refuse to fight, leaving you with options A, B, and…
D: The four guys rule the division like kings. The promotion does it’s job and promotes. The contenders do their best to pick their way up the division. Fans clamor more and more for the big “taboo” teammate fights, and as the benefit of having the fight increases, so to does the likelihood of the teammates having the fights. Or, you know, losing, as pretty much every fighter does with surprising regularity.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
honestly...
I honestly think Silva/Machida has the potential to be one of the most boring fights of all time. Two supremely talented and gifted fighters to be sure, but they have such similar styles it would be like shadowboxing in a mirror and seeing who will throw the first punch.
by sonnyboy1 on Aug 19, 2009 12:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My concern is that if they might accept the fight as a payday but not be really committed to the idea of beating each other. Does a guy look to knock out his buddy or out-point him? Does a guy look to crank a submission or work a positional game? There’s nothing inherently wrong with winning fights by attrition, but I don’t think that’s what promoters or fans who are keen on this idea want to get out of it.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are some substantial differences in mindset here
1. Is the DW mindset of capitalism. For DW his mindset is tuned to respect capitalism. Although he’s pretty big on loyalty, at the end of the day Dana’s mind works on dollars and cents. The reason he’s looking to pit AS against Machida is for money. Does he want to see who the best in the world is? Sure, but it’s not the primary reason. Therefore – if the payday is big enough, they will fight.
2. The individual sport mindset. I think this is being expressed by filipinomix2oo0 above. The mindset involves viewing MMA as a sport like Tennis, where you can come from the same academy and still play each other in singles. Whoever wins, wins. End of story. In my view, MMA is a little different. Beating somebody at tennis is a little different to punching them in the face. For me, MMA is not merely a sport, it is part of a lifestyle, a culture of martial arts that is centuries old.
3. The ‘team sport’ mind set. I think this is where most of the fighters (i.e. Marquardt, GSP etc) are coming from. They view the sport as a team sport, so they don’t want to fight someone on their own team. However, Diego Sanchez (a former Jackson protege) has since left the ‘team’ and I’m pretty sure GSP or the other Jackson guys would have no problem fighting him.
4. The ‘martial artist’ mind set. This is where I think Lyoto Machida (and maybe Anderson Silva) stands. If you’ve ever truly practiced martial arts, you know that there are some people out there, for whom money and power and prestige etc don’t mean that much. I don’t think that Lyoto is in the UFC to make money and become famous (Tito Ortiz IS). Lyoto is there to further himself – develop himself as a person and as a martial artist. This is the same mind set that Fedor has (which is why Fedor will never go against his principles for money). This is why those two guys are the only two who will never come out and say ’I’m the best’. Their mindset is just different from those who view themselves as ‘athletes’.
I personally don’t want to ever see Machida fight Silva or anyone from blackhouse. The day that Machida goes against his principles for money (or other worldly things) is the day that he loses.
by rainmaker6 on Aug 19, 2009 12:36 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Plus, you don’t run many risks of seriously impacting someones short, medium, and even long term career from playing them in a tennis match.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trying to find the source for this, but Lyoto’s brother supposedly has a scar on his face from fighting Lyoto in a tournament 10 or so years ago.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 19, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sources for Machida stories are elusive, like the man himself...
Hey if they really want to do it, I’ve got no problem with it at all. I’d love to see Silva and Machida fight. I would be blase regarding seeing them spar.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless, of course, Silva is doing impressions during the sparring session.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Machida is a pretty low key guy, I am trying to remember him commenting on fighting Silva, it seems that everything has been Silva saying he would not fight Machida.
Just read something recently about Machida getting an award or title from the city of Belem.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 19, 2009 1:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even if this is true
A karate tournament is a far cry away from MMA. I could fight my brother in a Karate tournament (and we beat each other up at the gym all the time). But to a point contest to a full-contact K him the FO is a big difference.
by rainmaker6 on Aug 19, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hell i can rember a year and a 1/2 or so ago, tons of fans were insisting that the aka guys should fight and that dana should make it so. now, that dana seems to be insisting it happen, many anti dana/ufc mma fans are acting like dana is being a control freak. this is the sense i’m getting at least, hope i’m wrong. :-)
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 12:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You caught us
All us anti-ufc guys were really on to something here too.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think what’s really holding the Dana White and the UFC back is all these contentious fighters and fans.
God willing, the inexorable power of biotechnology will one day soon allow the Fertitas to fashion a clone army of perfect, hairless, hammer-fisted Ultimen! Bred to fight who they are told and to unquestioningly hang onto Dana White’s every word.
A veritable Brave New World of MMA—as brave as it gets!
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
get my tin foil hat out huh? i’m not saying that it’s100% b/c of this, and i’m not saying everyone is that way who thinks this, but i was being honest about fans wanting to see the aka guys fight. all over the net, i read fans saying " i wanna see kos vs fitch, this is b.s that they wont fight just b/c they are teamates! they need to be proffesionals and put their friendship behind them, dana make it happen!" posts of that nature. but to say that people are not disagreeing with dana, due to their personal dislike for him is false.
sorry if i offended anyone.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I certainly wasn’t offended.
I remember a certain amount of clamor for some AKA match-ups, but I guess I considered it so unimportant as to more or less ignore it.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All this dana talk of the best fightin the best is BS, I want tomato can fights, Give me Machida vs. Tank, Make it happen dana.
by NinjaRehab on Aug 19, 2009 1:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Aren't Barnett & Monson friends?
They fought in Japan even though they’re good friends because not fighting each other meant taking food & income away from each other. Of course, there’s also a lot less options for opponents overseas, so it was probably more necessary for them.
Shameless self-promotion! http://twitter.com/scb0212
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Aug 19, 2009 1:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I’m pretty sure they are friends. I remember Barnett cornering Monson for a few fights in the UFC.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
as are barnett and fedor, but……….lol, we all now how that ended up.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 1:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Barnett/Monson fight was pretty solid too
Some guys have less qualms about such match-ups than others.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Teammates should fight teammates.
I’d like to see that. But ultimately if they don’t want to fight each other, I’m not interested. I’m sure Dana will try some strongarm tactics, and I’m sure guys like Swick won’t mind fighting their teammates, but I don’t think this would be a good move on Dana’s part. Sometimes a dictator can be a benevolent dictator, you know what I mean?
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Aug 19, 2009 1:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sherdog (ugh)
has a pretty good story about some of the history of teamates and friends fighting each other. josh thomson vs gilbert melendez was one of them (can’t believe i forgot that one). just type in friends vs friends on their search engine and there you’ll have it.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 1:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The paradox of anti-Sherdog fans—they feel compelled to type out a groan at the mere mention of the name, yet they read it and refer you to it.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 2:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so true
some of their writers are good, but i never read the fans blogs, at least not in a very long time.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 2:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fans blogs?
What Sherdog are you on?
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you meant the forum, then I understand and agree however.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 19, 2009 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes. their forum(i would have a few different names for it ) is exactly what i meant. it’s late and i’m think i’ll call it a night. later.
by bdw on Aug 19, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
by Richard Wade on Aug 19, 2009 2:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My one problem is the cornering. Say Keith Jardine and Rashad Evans fought each other. Well, part of what helps them prepare for a fight is their trainers and corner guys helping them prepare for a fight, namely Greg Jackson. Who is Greg supposed to corner come fight time? It does nothing but put the fighters at a handicap and prevents us from seeing the best Keith Jardine or the best Rashad Evans.
by Zack Gobie on Aug 19, 2009 2:11 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, not to be a dick, but is that really the UFC’s problem? The UFC is worried about making fights fans wanna see. If fans wanna see a fight b/w Jardine and Evans, then the UFC should try to make that fight happen. The UFC or any org. doesn’t and shouldn’t care about fighters’ corner situations.
by filipinomix2oo0 on Aug 19, 2009 2:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is the UFC’s problem because they want to put on the best fights, and two guys who don’t want to fight each other at all aren’t going to make for a good fight, at least most likely.
by Zack Gobie on Aug 19, 2009 2:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only fair way would be for Greg to corner neither of them – he could also decide who would best benefit each fighter in the corner, so they don’t have to make those picks & play favorites since GJ has the appearence (sp?) of objectivity.
Shameless self-promotion! http://twitter.com/scb0212
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Aug 19, 2009 2:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
MMA is different from other sports because of the purpose. The purpose of an MMA fight is to either knock out or make your opponent quit, you’re looking to hurt someone, so comparisons to other non-combat sports don’t really work for me. The goal of all sports is to win, but it’s hard to get someone to hurt their friend to win.
That said, anything is possible if the money is right. If dana wants these fights, he just has to make it so it’s the only viable option.
by Phildo on Aug 19, 2009 7:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Great discussion here people.
I would love to see team-mates fight each other, but only if it is absolutely necessary. Right now, if Anderson doesn’t want to fight Machida, it is not a big deal as Anderson is MW champ and not the #1 contender at LHW, so it is a non issue (apart from being a sweet matchup).
The AKA guys situation is a little different, but right now there is no reason to force them to fight. I think the main time to force a fight is if there is 1 champ and a clear cut #1 contender, and in this case the fighters SHOULD recognise that the fight needs to happen, and do it for the fans.
The issues surrounding the training camp are certainly surmountable, although obviously not ideal. Both fighters could train with different camps for the fight, or bigger camps could simply split in half. I daresay that the training partners are already completely aware of one anothers weaknesses, so it is not likely that there are too many secrets that could come out to compromise the gameplanning of either fighter.
'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko
by Well Read Idiot on Aug 19, 2009 7:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Kind of skipping the end here.
I agree that making teammates fight isn’t ideal, and I hope it never comes to that.
However, as a Promotion, the UFC has to be prepared to deal with situations that can develop such as what is going on in the WW division right now and what could possibly develop in LHW if Silva moves there permanently.
Frankly, I’d like to see the simply downgrade a couple guys, or at least refuse to give them quality matches if their teammate situation is going to start a log-jam in a division. Its not fair to the promotion, the fans or other fighters either.
by Razreshat on Aug 19, 2009 8:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dana White is a hypocrite
He says its about finding out who is the best. Then if that were the case you wouldn’t not sign someone who is in the other video game. White is a promoter, he can’t be trusted to tell the truth, ever.
His only goal is capital, not to see the best fight the best, cause if that was the case he would copromote/share fighters to make the best matchups available to really see who is the best
by WARMMA on Aug 19, 2009 8:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree that White lies and the very fact that he’s a promoter makes his word dubious. But he’s also a fanboy at heart, which is not true of all promoters. The whole Fedor incident was evident of his inner fanboy getting the best of him. And when it didn’t work out, the bitter fanboy and promoter in him basically went on autopilot, hence the tirades against Fedor after the fact.
At any rate, the only way I can see Dana getting teammates to fight each other is to offer money. Lots of it. Money talks.
I love me some Sexyama!
by pud333 on Aug 19, 2009 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only one particular fighter is outside of his grasp. In 5 years when Fedor is retired, do you think the UFC will be struggling to put on the best vs. best?
Eventually, all of the top fighters will fight under Zuffa and he can have that ultimate matchmaking control. Short-term pain, long-term gain. It’s not worth building up a competitor over one fighter as this may keep even more fighters from your promotion in the future.
by bigweeze on Aug 19, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s pretty simple for me: the people who can fight their teammates should and the people who can’t shouldn’t. I’d love to see Silva and Machida against each other, but I wouldn’t want to pay 50 bucks to see two guys who wouldn’t give it 110%. It’s a personal choice between those guys and their camps- nothing more.
by Gong on Aug 19, 2009 9:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If Silva and Machida don’t want to fight each other, tough titties for us.
That’s what it boils down to.
by Sergio Hernandez on Aug 19, 2009 9:59 AM EDT via mobile reply actions 2 recs
I’m always going back and forth on this. Sometimes I can see the view of both parties. I personally think that it should be avoided where possible (which shouldn’t be too hard) but then when it has to happen, the fighters should oblige and figure out a way that they can train and not totally screw it up.
by Dooda on Aug 19, 2009 1:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
